pull down to refresh
Maybe they were expecting a quick surrender like Russia was expecting with Ukraine
That, or they actually intend the outcomes that they keep getting.
Plus war did have rules as ironic as it sounds. Striking this water plant might be considered a war crime under the Geneva convention?
I know, but amongst those rules were things like not assassinating enemy rulers. Regime change, as the stated purpose of a conflict, changes the incentives. Would you rather deal with war crime allegations or be dead?
I'm torn on this, because I don't believe people are smart enough to design complex social systems like this.
On the other hand, once you see the results, which were not what was expected, there can definitely be groups who benefited from the outcome and want more of it.
US wealth and power is highly dependent upon resource hegemony and the petrodollar backed by the US military.
USA is no longer competitive as a manufacturer and producer in most sectors- China has won the trade war.
Now a desperate USA, losing global economic dominance is using its military power to try and retain dominance.
USA cannot swiftly replace the armaments it is using up in the middle east and Ukraine because it does not have the supply of rare earths and other critical inputs.
US empire is facing an existential threat from China and is fighting for its survival.
Losing in Iran would be the turning point where US hegemony collapses and Chinese dominance becomes the new reality.
Trump and Nato are already losing in Ukraine.
This is WW3.
It is a war of attrition and China has the upper hand.
Expect Taiwan handover timetable to be agreed at the Trump Xi meeting next month.
USA on its knees.
Regime change wars, by definition, are existential threats to the sitting regime. Why would anyone expect them to have any boundaries?